linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix signed vs unsigned comparison in ext4_valid

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20191023184332.GC7689@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:43:33 -0700
From:   Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
To:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix signed vs unsigned comparison in
 ext4_valid_extent()

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 09:15:46AM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 10:44:47PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > 
> > This patch can't be fixing anything because the comparison is unsigned both
> > before and after this patch.
> 
> Thanks, you're right; I had forgotten C's signed/unsigned rules for
> addition.  The funny thing is the original reporter of BZ #205197
> reported that the problem went away he tried a similar patch.

Not trying to stick my nose in too much here but:

What does it mean if ext4_ext_get_actual_len() to return < 0?

Ira

> 
> 	      	  	       	    - Ted